Obamacare to increase premiums by 304 percent???

[♪alt13]

I don't understand the law that well, or understand the reasoning companies have behind doing that. All I am saying is that the numbers being thrown out by some are outrageous and obviously wrong. Your bros situation sucks. But if he really is that poor, he would probably qualify for huge subsidies on healthcare. Probably ( in a lot of states) would be covered by the expanded Medicaid coverage being rolled out?

yeah so like I said he should just give up trying and live off the government. If he succeeds in making a little more it will be a wash for him. It is really hard for people who fall right on that line between poverty and middle class. He was doing pretty well and moving along until he was stalled by an obamacare layoff. You want to tell him it's ok because he can get medicaid now while living in his mothers basement?

 

[b_line]

yeah so like I said he should just give up trying and live off the government. If he succeeds in making a little more it will be a wash for him. It is really hard for people who fall right on that line between poverty and middle class. He was doing pretty well and moving along until he was stalled by an obamacare layoff and you want to tell him it's ok because he can get medicaid now while living in his mothers basement?

Didn't say that. You sure are saying a lot of things for me.

All I said was that 300% inflation of healthcare costs are greatly exaggerated. My experience was that my premium went down.

As I said before, I don't understand the companies that layoff employees to save money on healthcare costs. I do not know what the specifics are in the aca as far as companies providing coverage, or why it would be so expensive. I was speaking to my personal experience. That is all.

 

[♪alt13]

yes you did.

I don't understand the law that well, or understand the reasoning companies have behind doing that. All I am saying is that the numbers being thrown out by some are outrageous and obviously wrong. Your bros situation sucks. But if he really is that poor, he would probably qualify for huge subsidies on healthcare. Probably ( in a lot of states) would be covered by the expanded Medicaid coverage being rolled out?

 

[♪alt13]

@ b_line

How do you think your insurer is able to provide you with a 50% cut in your premiums while the actual cost for healthcare, should you need it, is rising?

 

[b_line]

yes you did.

That in no way shape or form says give up and live in your moms basement. He and you can do whatever you want. I did not say anything about that.

 

[b_line]

@ b_line

How do you think your insurer is able to provide you with a 50% cut in your premiums while the actual cost for healthcare, should you need it, is rising?

My provider is cutting it about 20%. The gov is providing subsidy for the other part.

My theory is that people who don't have insurance and can't afford healthcare at this time are making hospitals super expensive. My reasoning behind this is every time I have questioned a hospital why routine things cost so much they answer me by saying that they have to keep the doors open, even when people can't pay. So I am paying for the guys who skip out on paying and have collectors calling all the time. Either that it the guys that give fake names and never pay at all. If these people have insurance, the cost for honest people goes down because we no longer have to pay for them.

 

[♪alt13]

That in no way shape or form says give up and live in your moms basement. He and you can do whatever you want. I did not say anything about that.

You seem to think that it's ok that he was lost a large portion of his income because now he can get medicaid. You've put on political blinders bro. A bill that was sold to you as helping the poor is doing just the opposite.

 

[♪alt13]

My provider is cutting it about 20%. The gov is providing subsidy for the other part.

My theory is that people who don't have insurance and can't afford healthcare at this time are making hospitals super expensive. My reasoning behind this is every time I have questioned a hospital why routine things cost so much they answer me by saying that they have to keep the doors open, even when people can't pay. So I am paying for the guys who skip out on paying and have collectors calling all the time. Either that it the guys that give fake names and never pay at all. If these people have insurance, the cost for honest people goes down because we no longer have to pay for them.

This is circular logic nothing has been done to change the bottom line. When your insurance company pays that guys bill nothing has changed you have just shifted the burden from the hospital to the insurer who in turn will have to shift the cost to their customers through increased premiums. The people that aren't paying generally have nothing to pay. They will not contribute to the premium pool and so their share of them will be shifted to the government who will in turn have to shift that burden to the tax payer.

Obamacare simply reorganizes who pays but does nothing to address the actual rising costs.

 

[b_line]

You seem to think that it's ok that he was lost a large portion of his income because now he can get medicaid. You've put on political blinders bro. A bill that was sold to you as helping the poor is doing just the opposite.

Ok, fine. But I have never thought the bill was about helping poor people. I am more interested in the country in general. I think it sucks that he lost half of his income. That is terrible.

From what I have seen, I think company owners are blinded politically as well. The get a bee in their bonnet about obamacare, and all of a sudden they have to cut half of their workforce prematurely. Maybe I am wrong, but maybe these business owners are wrong too.

By the way, I wish your bro the best. I get super stressed about life when I don't have a job that fits my abilities or provides for my families needs. I know it sucks really bad to be in that situation.

 

[b_line]

This is circular logic nothing has been done to change the bottom line. When your insurance company pays that guys bill nothing has changed you have just shifted the burden from the hospital to the insurer who in turn will have to shift the cost to their customers through increased premiums. The people that aren't paying generally have nothing to pay. They will not contribute to the premium pool and so there share of them will be shifted to the government who will in turn have to shift that burden to the tax payer.

Obamacare simply reorganizes who pays but does nothing to address the actual rising costs.

? Since when is paying a monthly premium not contributing to the premium pool? If they get insurance, their premium is paid. Otherwise they will have no insurance. They might get a subsidy, but the premium is still there. Subsidies are never 100%, from my understanding.

 

[♪alt13]

? Since when is paying a monthly premium not contributing to the premium pool? If they get insurance, their premium is paid. Otherwise they will have no insurance. They might get a subsidy, but the premium is still there. Subsidies are never 100%, from my understanding.

Where does the subsidy come from?

 

[LogGrad98]

No we have had insurance. It has decreased for the same coverage each of the last three years. Three years ago we could not afford the private insurance at the same coverage leveled have now. Last year our premium was $8400, this year $6,000, next year with obamacare it will e $4100 for the same coverage (after subsidies)

Again, this is just my experience. I find it hard to believe that healthcare costs will go up 300 percent or more.

What insurance do you have? I want in. I haven't seen a single major corporation or small employer do anything but raise premiums and decrease coverage consistently over the past 10 years.

 

[LogGrad98]

I do think people are lying when they say their premiums are going up 300%. That can not be true. Either they are lying or they just have not done the research. I am for the act be cause I genuinely think it will lower healthcare costs across the board.

I don't understand the law that well, or understand the reasoning companies have behind doing that. All I am saying is that the numbers being thrown out by some are outrageous and obviously wrong. Your bros situation sucks. But if he really is that poor, he would probably qualify for huge subsidies on healthcare. Probably ( in a lot of states) would be covered by the expanded Medicaid coverage being rolled out?

You say you think it will decrease costs, but then you say you don't understand the bill. If you don't understand it then A) how do you figure it will cut costs and B) how do you "know" the figures that are being "thrown out there" are all wrong or lies?

How will it decrease costs?

 

[LogGrad98]

I do think people are lying when they say their premiums are going up 300%. That can not be true. Either they are lying or they just have not done the research. I am for the act be cause I genuinely think it will lower healthcare costs across the board.

Ok, fine. But I have never thought the bill was about helping poor people. I am more interested in the country in general. I think it sucks that he lost half of his income. That is terrible.

From what I have seen, I think company owners are blinded politically as well. The get a bee in their bonnet about obamacare, and all of a sudden they have to cut half of their workforce prematurely. Maybe I am wrong, but maybe these business owners are wrong too.

By the way, I wish your bro the best. I get super stressed about life when I don't have a job that fits my abilities or provides for my families needs. I know it sucks really bad to be in that situation.

This just shows you don't know a lot about the inner workings at most corporations, especially the large ones. Very few of them can afford to operate in a purely political space. They look at numbers, plain and simple, and when they do the math and see a huge increase in costs looming, they immediately start thinking of ways to mitigate the cost. Laying off people is almost always a last resort, as it costs a lot to hire, train, and retain. For a front line warehouse worker it costs us on average $2500 to hire someone and train them, so if they leave after a month or 2 because we are not providing a competitive wage or benefits, then we lose out on that $2500 and have to do it all over again. Believe me that is not a cost they want to incur just because Obama made them so darn mad! There are lots of other costs that have to be accounted for as well.

This is just one simple example, the cost of turnover, that companies have to take into account when making these kinds of broad sweeping decisions that could make or break them in a very short period of time. Luckily for the vast majority of Americans, and for our economy as a whole, more often than not they get it right, or close enough to right to keep things moving. If they were really that helpless and terrible at making decisions no business would last a year and the economy would fall apart.

 

[The Thriller]

Are these numbers really accurate? Will premiums for many people increase 300+ percent?

 

[Stoked]

I don't understand the law that well, or understand the reasoning companies have behind doing that. All I am saying is that the numbers being thrown out by some are outrageous and obviously wrong. Your bros situation sucks. But if he really is that poor, he would probably qualify for huge subsidies on healthcare. Probably ( in a lot of states) would be covered by the expanded Medicaid coverage being rolled out?

You assume they are wrong.

 

[NUMBERICA]

It's a weird idea to me that we're supposed to save money by paying into a wildly for-profit system that thusly has no financial incentive to promote longterm health. It's immoral for the richest nation on earth to also be the only 1st world nation on earth that doesn't consider the health of it's citizens as a duty. Obama/Romney-care seems like the most convoluted and worst way to approach the virtues of both care for every person and also doing it cost-effectively.

But I can see how this plan could be a substantial improvement to the way things have been on paper, and there needs to be SOME comprehensive plan put in place to handle this absolutely enormous issue (as the do nothing and let it work itself out plan has done nothing but worsen the issue). I appreciate that one side is willing to try something of that nature, and I don't appreciate the other side diving into histrionics and sabotage tactics. All I ask of people in general and this process at this point is to wait until we've actually experienced what is to come than the circus that's been happening for four years.

 

[NUMBERICA]

This video made the rounds not that long ago and it's kind of obnoxious, but I thought it was interesting. So pardon me if you've seen this before and/or think it's just the stupidest thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSjGouBmo0M

 

[moevillini]

Excellent!

https://wws.princeton.edu/people/display_person.xml?netid=reinhard&display=C

He sounds a lot like this guy!

Title: James Madison Professor of Political Economy
Professor of Economics and Public Affairs
Area(s): Fiscal/Monetary policy
Health policy

https://www.princeton.edu/~reinhard/


Recognized as one of the nation’s leading authorities on health care economics, Reinhardt has been a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences since 1978. He is a past president of the Association of Health Services Research. From 1986 to 1995 he served as a commissioner on the Physician Payment Review Committee, established in 1986 by Congress to advise it on issues related to the payment of physicians. He is a senior associate of the Judge Institute for Management of Cambridge University, UK, and a trustee of Duke University, and the Duke University Health System. Reinhardt is or was a member of numerous editorial boards, among them the Journal of Health Economics, the Milbank Memorial Quarterly, Health Affairs, the New England Journal of Medicine, and the Journal of the American Medical Association. Ph.D. Yale University.

 

[franklin]

Just used a calculator for aca coverage costs on kff.com. Looks like my coverage for a family of three will decrease in cost by 29% next year through "obamacare". Damn president. Saving me money on my already admittedly inexpensive healthcare plan.

Seriously though, what is all the fuss about? I do not see the rising costs of healthcare. In all my interactions with insurance agents and healthcare lately, I have noticed things being less expensive, and not the other way around. Granted, mine is anecdotal evidence, but I have not seen any hard evidence pointing to the "health care will go up 300%" garbage.

I agree. The conservatives are outright lying that it will increase their premiums, just like they're lying that congress exempt themselves and that they get a 75% Obamacare subsidy (they can't make up their minds which one it is, even though it's neither). I couldn't find a scenario where mine would do anything but decrease until I'm 64 (the maximum age, as med kicks in).

HOWEVER! My premium would decrease from over $14k/yr to under $8k, with similar coinsurance amounts (I hate that term) and no subsidy for me. Something is obviously fishy. There's no way in hell that Obama is cutting my insurance premiums damn near in half with some piddling cost savings legislation.

Looking at the "Silver" plan, it has a huge *** out of pocket maximum (OOP) of $12,700/yr. How is co-insurance 70% (similar to my 60%), but the OOP is outrageous?